I'll join if there's space!

I'll send a race, feel free to ignore if you don't have space for me, but do let me know if I get in

-Era

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

dejan wrote on Thu, 09 September 2004 11:47

This is exploitable too. Somebody will have 10 differenet desings for chaff 10x100=1000 chaff

There are 16 ship designs. So lets see:
1) Scout
2) Colonizer
3) Freighter
4) tech trade ship
5) Minelayer
6) Bomber
So that leaves 10 designs for chaff and sorry none for warships!

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Lordpenguin wrote on Thu, 09 September 2004 07:54

i know these rules are expoitable, i just would like to be able to trust you not to use chaff. if i can't, then i might have to make more strict rules, like no more than 100 ships in any location whenever, whatever.

Well I would not warry about chaff much, because we are playing in small universe, I don't beileve that we would come to very hi tech era, so chaff would be expensive in minerals. Also this 100 ship is a limitation, because there is no horde tactics with this limitation which is bad

Report message to a moderator

Kotk wrote on Thu, 09 September 2004 06:07

dejan wrote on Thu, 09 September 2004 11:47 This is exploitable too. Somebody will have 10 differenet desings for chaff 10x100=1000 chaff There are 16 ship designs. So lets see: 1) Scout 2) Colonizer 3) Freighter 4) tech trade ship 5) Minelayer 6) Bomber So that leaves 10 designs for chaff and sorry none for warships!

well in the time when chaff come into play, you don't need scouts , also colonizers are debatable too.

Report message to a moderator

dejan wrote on Thu, 09 September 2004 14:14

well in the time when chaff come into play, you don't need scouts , also colonizers are debatable too.

Did you think i gave complete list? Have you ever played multiplayer? Is it actually debatable? sweepers, skirmishers, chaff shredders, fuelers, remote miners, overcloakers, any ships with racial gadgets like Orbital Adjusters, Robber Barons, Tachylons, Energy dampeners and Speed trap or Heavy dispensers, old models in the middle of upgrade etc. If you got no ships anyway why you need decoy?

Report message to a moderator

Quote:

1) Scout 2) Colonizer 3) Freighter 4) tech trade ship 5) Minelayer 6) Bomber So that leaves 10 designs for chaff and sorry none for warships!

Quote:

Did you think i gave complete list? Have you ever played multiplayer? Is it actually debatable? sweepers, skirmishers, chaff shredders, fuelers, remote miners, overcloakers, any ships with racial gadgets like Orbital Adjusters, Robber Barons, Tachylons, Energy dampeners and Speed trap or Heavy dispensers, old models in the middle of upgrade etc. If you got no ships anyway why you need decoy?

You could easily combine the coloniser into the freighter design and if you choose Joat your chaff could dual as scouts. If that's inconvenient due to the lack of fuel then you could build a DD to dual as scout/fuel pod and perhaps stick a couple of guns onboard.
Being Joat you also have no special ships to take up slots.
If you then only build 6 different chaff designs, it still allows up to 600 chaff in the one location and a few slots available for warships.
Then if you're lucky to be against AR no bomber is required

Quote:

i know these rules are expoitable, i just would like to be able to trust you not to use chaff. if i can't, then i might have to make more strict rules, like no more than 100 ships in any location whenever, whatever.

No more than 100 ships in one location might spoil the game a bit. It would be better to rule on what is chaff and what is not upfront and just ban it (if that's what the host wants to achieve).

Something like all armed ships must have either at least 1 x shield or 1 x scanner onboard would help and then if you ban all ships with only one laser after say 2440 and perhaps ban lasers weap3 or below (entirely) in the same year.
Next perhaps ban Weap10 or below lasers at 2460.

You might need a few more restrictions than that because there's always someone looking to exploit the situation, but it's a good start.

[Updated on: Thu, 09 September 2004 16:04]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Hi!

Steve1 wrote on Thu, 09 September 2004 21:57

You might need a few more restrictions than that because there's always someone looking to exploit the situation, but it's a good start.

My I add my with suggesting ALL slots on each design have to be filled full, and Scout hull banned after year 2450?
BR, Iztok

Report message to a moderator

Quote:

I will be playing, but i'm not sure how actively...

Quote:

it doesn't really matter. in this game, if i see what i would call chaff, then that player gets a warning. Again, and they get a second warning. If i see it a third time then they are out.

I think you might encounter problems there. If someone devotes 5 years of their resources to building warships that you then determine to be chaff, they will not be a happy chappy. Especially so if you actively play.

Not sure how many games you've hosted, but often you'll find that no matter how fair you try to be someone still gets upset. If you then throw into the mix your own defination of chaff on the fly, problems are highly likely.

I suppose if you played as a neutral host and made a ruling that all ship designs had to be submitted to you for approval before building it could work, but then you'd have to ensure that you're available to the players a great deal more than a host usually would be. Building a new design just in time can make the difference between saving your empire or not and if you weren't available to approve the new design before that year's generation it might prove costly to someone.

I still think that defining chaff upfront would be a safer and better option.

[Updated on: Thu, 09 September 2004 16:26]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Steve1 wrote on Thu, 09 September 2004 22:11

Not sure how many games you've hosted, but often you'll find that no matter how fair you try to be someone still gets upset. If you then throw into the mix your own defination of chaff on the fly, problems are highly likely.

Steve and I had the same experience: playing in game "Summer" with the host Greg Vorbarra. Chaff wasn't allowed there too (his definition: Chaff -- not allowed - use of large numbers of scout/frigate/destroyer with low tech weapons later in game is prohibited.), and we got into discussions, because one player claimed that the other used chaff. It got an ugly discussion... I wouldn't recommend that to any host. Make the rules CLEAR at the beginning. Even more when the host is playing.

Andreas / wizard

Report message to a moderator

People try to define chaff by design but why you avoid defineing it by usage?

The difference between horde and chaff is that horde is the attack power while chaff is *escorting* the attack power. Same goes with sweepers, skirmishers, orbital checkers and so on. They sweep minefields, skirmish and check orbitals. They do not hang around with large warships in numbers above 50.

Chaff is not so cost effective against Jihads. Shielded cruisers seem to absorb the damage better, especially with RS. Real missiles... like Juggers appear about 2450 or later.

So my suggestion how to define chaff: "If someone uses over 50 below construction 7 ships escorting their fleets of bigger ships after 2450 then it is chaff."

Why to ban chaff: Banning chaff gives advantage to SD who cannot effectively chaff sweep itself, has energy dampener to improve the effectiveness of missile fire and is very hard to fight against without chaff-sweeping sometimes.
Other PRT that gets good advantages is WM. Missile dread is real bad boy to face without chaff indeed. WM-s own chaff sucks anyway.
Perhaps lord penguin loves SD & WM slugfests so lot.

Report message to a moderator

Quote:

Steve and I had the same experience: playing in game "Summer" with the host Greg Vorbarra. Chaff wasn't allowed there too (his definition: Chaff -- not allowed - use of large numbers of scout/frigate/destroyer with low tech weapons later in game is prohibited.), and we got into discussions, because one player claimed that the other used chaff. It got an ugly discussion... I wouldn't recommend that to any host. Make the rules CLEAR at the beginning. Even more when the host is playing.

Actually I wasn't even including that game in my example. The bipolar Gregor certainly cheated and didn't host fairly, but I was thinking of the 2nd game I ever played on autohost where the host played as true neutral. The host was playing totally fair but was accused of bias by my ally. This player was totally tripping!!!
He sent these excessively long emails (we are talking pages long) to the host accusing her of all sorts of infractions, when in truth I believe she was totally fair. She was understandably offended and he ended up quitting, never to be heard from again.

[Updated on: Fri, 10 September 2004 10:25]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Quote:

Well, were is it? Cant find it on Autohost. Does Autohost have a lag or did you not start the game yet? Or am I too stupid to find it?

A delay is usual in getting a game started. Somtimes one day, sometimes a week.
I guess you'll just have to be patient

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Ahem - any news?

Waiting for almost a week now.


Greetz
Thul

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator